Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Games with Gold games (2nd nomination)

Add links
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Yunshui 雲水 13:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Games with Gold games

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

List of Games with Gold games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOT#CATALOG, and based on rationale from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of free Epic Games Store games. Because these games were only free for a limited time, the list helps no one else in the future. That there are free games via Games with Gold is fair to include on the Xbox Live Gold page, but listing out all examples is inappropriate. Masem (t) 16:17, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To add, while there are similar lists for PSN games and other services, I do not want to do a mass AFD until there's clearly rationale from this and the Epic Games to justify going forward. --Masem (t) 16:18, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Better to have the big discussion now. If you do it in steps, people will just fall back on "uh ok I agree with what we did last time". Gianttrombone (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To add more, I reviewed the first AFD , from 2014, and I suggest !voters compare that to the arguments in the Epic Games Store one. I think the first basically was kept on a a mass-voted "OTHERSTUFFEXISTS" argument, but that was rejected in the Epic Games Store list. --Masem (t) 16:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not seeing what you mean by "mass voting". I don't see a pile on on a "we have other lists like this argument", the only such "other list" call out is to the PS+ free games list. Gianttrombone (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Masem (t) 16:17, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per nom and WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Pretty useful and visited list as for me with interwikies that are not updated regularly unlike the English one though( There are no WP:NOT#CATALOG issues, since there are no prices, availability can be verified all over the web with prescribed “independent sources” (a-ka “mainstream media”) with “commentaries.” There are no comparisons of games with these games themselves on other platforms/storefronts too (eg. where one is cheaper or so).
I disagree with Masem's take “the list helps no one else in the future,” since the list is helpful within every 15–31 days span: you may see that there are different games being offered for different regions, so you may timely migrate your account and redeem additional/other games (per WP:NOT#CATALOG: “Prices and product availability can vary widely from place to place and over time. Wikipedia is not a price comparison service to compare the prices of competing products, or the prices and availability of a single product from different vendors or retailers” – I've hinted above that products not compete, they (games offered) complement each other, plus there are different products for different countries (we may see separate games for Japan, South Africa, Singapore and the likes every other month). -- pr12402, 30 December, 2019
This is absolutely a NOTCATALOG issue: it lists games that were $0.00 for a limited time. --Masem (t) 23:03, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Would you interpret wiki policy as ruling out a list of all Xbox games? What about a list of Xbox games that meet some non-monetary criterion? Some monetary criterion other than "they were free on the Store once"?Gianttrombone (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, lists of games published for a platform is fine (as long as we have sourcing to support them - with the rise of indie games we cannot be fully inclusive for any indie game). There, there's no monetary factor or sales factor involve but to give an idea of the size of the game library and comparitive dates and releases. --Masem (t) 01:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So your objection is to the money part, because you interpret WP:NOTDIR as ruling out shopping lists. Got it. Gianttrombone (talk) 06:15, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Games with Gold is effectively a storefront, and we do not list out all the products a storefront offers. A straight-up list of games for a system is not a storefront, it's documenting the notable titles that can be played on a game system which DOES have encyclopedic (not just useful) value. --Masem (t) 06:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:50, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect: This question is borderline for me. I think the topic easily clears WP:LISTN but on balance, it also ends up being a shopping list and thus fails WP:NOTDIR. I would support delete but I don't like wiki page deletion on principle except when there is no other legal or ethical option due to deletion being nearly unrecoverable. And also, in this particular case, I suspect this particular page is borderline for many other people as well. So, I recommend we replace the page text with a redirect to the Gold page rather than permadeleting the page. As well as making it possible to bring back the page without administrative DB fishing, it will also make it so the information can be gradually parted out and migrated to the individual game pages. Gianttrombone (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"deletion being nearly unrecoverable." This is not true. Any mod or admin can restore a deleted article. There is no such thing as "permadeleting"; if you're referring to WP:SALT, articles can be de-salted by contacting the protecting admin or through the deletion review process. "We shouldn't burn our bridges" is simply not a valid argument at AfD.--Martin IIIa (talk) 03:19, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. If the list of Epic Game Store free games was deleted, this should be by the same token, as it's no different at all.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:29, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is absolutely trivia and not even useful trivia at that. This is a list of games that used to be free but no longer so Too Bad You Didn't Get Them Neener Neener Neener. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A list of games that at one time were available on a digital service? Seems like WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTCATALOG to me. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:55, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm also in the delete column here. No matter how you frame it, it really comes off as extremely trivial. That's not what a list article should contain. Red Phoenix talk 12:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Pretty useful and visited often. No reason to delete simply on principle. cherkash (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:ITSPOPULAR, which are two reasons not to keep on principle. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why? There is is no list there and never will be so someone looking this up won’t find what they are looking for.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 22:42, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom's rationale and WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Ajf773 (talk) 21:10, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom's rationale and WP:NOTCATALOGUE. It seems trivial and the games were only free for a short time. The list doesn't actually help people, so why have it? — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 23:10, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think the List of Games with Gold games should be kept as it is a useful source to confirm whether a title has ever been made available in this program. The reason I'm stating this is because one's Xbox Live Gold account doesn't record which titles one has obtained in this program (ie there is no purchase history) so it's essential to have this resource that one can check to confirm that the title was available as a Games with Gold title when one suspects that a title may have been removed from one's Ready to install list and therefore one becomes prompted to re-purchase it. This is even more important now that titles are being added to GamePass (all variations) when such titles are only in the GamePass system for a limited time (ie when removed from GamePass then the possibility exists that users may once again get prompted to re-purchase). User:FrathosCAN
Hi @FrathosCAN:, welcome to Wikiepdia! Please add new comments on the bottom of a talk page. To address your vote, Wikipedia is not a directory for Xbox owners to look up whether or not a game has been added to Xbox Live or GamePass. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:26, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete basically all the Keep comments fall under wikipedia:NOTCATALOGUE. There may be good reasons to have such a list elsewhere but Wikipedia is not the place.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Pretty clear-cut case of WP:NOTCATALOG. The information is only relevant until the game is removed from Games with Gold, and only for shopping purposes.--Martin IIIa (talk) 03:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Games_with_Gold_games_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=936902740"